Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130209
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12
year, mr. brennan called those legal, ethical and wise and the highest counterterrorism standard to limit the loss of civilian life. here's what he had to say in april of 2012. >> i stand here as someone who has been involved in our nation's security for more than 30 years. i have a profound appreciation for the truly remarkable capabilities of our counterterrorism professionals and our relationships with other nations and we must never compromise them. i will not discuss the sensitive details of any specific operation today. i will not, nor will i ever publicly divulge sensitive sources and methods, for when that happens our national security is endangered and lives could be lost. at the same time, we reject the notion that any discussion of these matters is a step on to a slippery slope that endanger our national security. too often, that fear can become an excuse for saying nothing at all, which creates a void that is then filled with myths and falsehoods. that, in turn, can erode our credibility with the american people and foreign partners and undermine the public's understa
for your introduction, if that is agreeable. mr. brennan, congratulations on your nomination. i would like to welcome your family as well. i hope you will introduce them so the committee can give them its thanks. this is the first opportunity also to welcome our new members senator heinrich is on my right, senator king who is due any moment, senator collins on my left, and senator coburn, who is not here at the moment but who will be, who is returning to the committee. we have a new ex-officio member, senator inhofe. welcome to all of you. the director of the cia is among the most critical national security positions and the united states government. but because of the role the cia plays in collecting and analyzing intelligence relevant to every national security challenge we face and because of the added importance of having steady leadership at an organization that conducts most of its business outside of the public arena, intelligence is critical to the successful draw-down in afghanistan, to the brutal war going on in syria, across north africa where the attacks in benghazi and hostage
through the agency's ranks since of gates. mr. brennan, congratulations on your nomination. senator warner has come in. i will make opening comments. the vice chairman will make opening, and then we will turn to you for your introduction if that is agreeable. mr. brennan, congratulations on your nomination. it is currently a lively. i would like to welcome your family as well. i am -- i hope you introduce them so the committee can give them its banks. this is the first opportunity to welcome our new members. senator heinrich who is on my right, sadr king, who is -- senator king, due any minute. senator collins and senator coburn who is not here but will be. we have a new? officio member, senator and half -- ex officio member, senator inhofe. because of the role the cia plays, collecting information. because of the added importance of having steady leadership at an organization that conducts most of its business outside of the public arena. intelligence is critical to the successful drawdown in afghanistan, to their brutal war going on within serious borders, across north africa where attac
, no response required." mr. brennan, that is your shop. do you have any knowledge about why senator graham's question was not to be answered? >> there is a longstanding tradition understanding of respecting the executive privilege that exists in the presidency in terms of what information is provided to the president or advice, counsel, to him. i would suspect that that question gets into this issue of the executive privilege which i think again has been a long standing tradition. >> are you sure that is the answer or do you think? >> i do not understand, because that will not be a request coming to me. >> i understand, so my direction to you, at what i ask you, is that you review that. we will get you the and notation, if necessary. secretary panetta told us it was detainee information that was key to them finding the courier and bin laden. were you briefed by any of the analysts who tracked down bin laden? >> before the operation? >> yes. >> yes, absolutely. >> is that the information given to you, that it came from interrogation of detainees on whom eip's had been used? >> i cannot reca
was hopeful from mr. brennan's testimony that it may be the case now. as far as transparency goes, the public needs to know about the overall program. but as far as the nuances, i don't think that we want to put that out for public consumption. thank you very much. atlanta, georgia. republicans line. caller: thank you. first of all, i think it is a very dangerous idea to legalized killing. as the other gentleman was saying, does he think it is okay to kill people. i think it is a bad idea because, first of all -- and i was listening to mr. brennan and he was saying it is ok, it should be recognized. but killing anyone is an unlawful act. i think we should use the constitution and bring people to justice. because it gives opening doors for other countries to say, we can drone people who spy on our country. i think it is a very bad idea for people to forget about human rights and the americans -- not only american kids but what about the other kids who died, in somalia, iraq. are you saying their life -- americans' lives are more sacred than other peoples? this is incorrect, and i think people'
. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. brennan, we acknowledge your experience and i think that experience is important to have for the position that if confirmed you will occupy. we acknowledge your commitment to your country and your experience in this field. i think the president used that as one of the criteria. you and i when we talked earlier in a private talk, we talked about the relationship that you want to have with this committee, not with just the chairman and the vice chairman with b was all members. i appreciate your answer on that. you addressed it today in terms of trust deficit, you said that was unacceptable. you would give straight answers and be blunt and candid. it is not a prerequisite to do that to be director of c.i.a. so i don't hold that as -- it would probably be a red flag if someone had that award and wanted your position. the kind of issues you have to deal with require straight talk, straight answers, and getting to the chase real quickly. you said it is the new jersey way, i accept that, it is bipartisan. governor christie exhibits the same kind of responses
.s. intelligence officials who were part of those briefings say mr. brennan, then deputy executive director of the c.i.a.'s administrative arm, did not raise objections to the interrogation practices. john been unanimous' silence back then may have cost him his first chance to lead the spy agency. the issue is likely to come up again as mr. brennan faces his confirmation hearing to be director of the c.i.a. you can hear live coverage of the senate intelligence committee hearing tomorrow at 2:30 p.m. eastern time. that's february 7. listen to it hear on c-span radio. and this just in from the associated press, president obama is planning to nominate business executive sally jewel to lead the interior department. the financially struggling u.s. postal service says it plans to stop delivering mail on saturdays, but it will continue delivering packages six days a week. the service is expected to say the cut, beginning in august, would mean a cost savings of about $2 billion annually. the move accentuates one of the agency's strong points. package delivery has increased by 14% since 2010. the de
be worthwhile, if you are confirmed, to meet with mr. brennan to talk about coordination between the two agencies so do not end up with similar if not identical functions in different regions of the world with different command structures, rules of engagement, etc. -- counter- terrorism covers the gap or the relationship between traditional defense and the intelligence committee. -- community. >> that is an area that is becoming more relevant and complicated. title and reverses title 50. -- title n versus title 50. >> final thought -- but not think we can adequately assess the size and importance of the cyber threat. that may well be the war of the future. my sense is that we are not -- we are all talking about it, but i am not sure we have a sense of urgency. and the secretary panetta has increased our proposed increase of that capacity. people can die, and their society could be brought to a standstill without our rocket ever taking off or are planned and treating our airspace. i hope that will be a point of emphasis, because i think that maybe the next war. >> i agree. as you know, i
, we would all be paying attention to mr. brennan who is the nominee to be director of central intelligence and who has himself a history of some controversy on both the heft and the right ironically. so if we could just talk about what the implications of this are, and i'm going to try and put these two questions together, actually, and to digress and explain this question a little better, many of us who work in foreign policy studied history because that's what draws you in. and in the old days polysci and ir were fields that weren't exactly embraced as they are now, and for those of us who did study history, a hot remember that all these inconsequential and rather interesting countries whether it was the czechoslovakias or malis of the time were the precursors to larger battles that could have been dealt with had they been dealt with early. i wonder if just sort of thinking through that prism where we see things going, but maybe take the nominees, and i'm going to just throw it open and see who grabs the mic first. tom. >> okay. you're putting it in front of my face, you kne
it as terrorist attack, and that was my view. >> and mr. brennan, who is going to be having a hearing later today that i won't be attending. i consider him to be one of the foremost intelligence experts around with twenty or twenty five years experience. would you agree with that? >> yes, indeed. >> he stated to me and will state again this afternoon the same thing you just said. that we realized at that moment it was a planned terrorist attack. now, the only question i want to ask you i'll ask you for an answer now and i doubt if you'll have a good answer. but after that i'd like to have you think about it and give an answer for the record. that is with everyone agreeing including the secretary clinton that right after this took place, that was in fact a planned terrorist attack. how in the world could ambassador rice say, quote, the information this is five days later -- the information the best information and the best assessment we have to date is that in fact this was not a preplained premeditated attack. >> no. again, i mean, i was not involved in the talking points. that were presented to
mind. >> they knew that at the time and unequivocally is a terrorist attack. do you agree, mr. secretary agree, mr. secretary, it was an attack on the annex? >> i said it was three days. >> that is what john brennan said also been used unequivocably. sometimes someone has to ask the question, if that was true with this presentation by susan rice, before all of america is the fact was it was not a preplanned or premeditated attack. i will not ask you to respond to that the people understand everybody knew that it was free planned and premeditated attack. >> senator reid. >> hq secretary, as you point* out there were two attacks one of the compound and one on the annex. but the time chart indicates there is a significant gap on the first at midnight and the appointment of mortars and rpg's did that indicate it took awhile to organize themselves to conduct a full blown attack that that with general dempsey they seized an opportunity then supplement the firepower coordinating attacks suggesting there was improvisation with the planning? >> the second was much more deliberate and p
have been a terrorist attack. and of course the thing i'm getting -- do you agree, mr. secretary, that it was unequivocally a terrorist attack on the annex? >> when i appeared before this committee three days afterwards i said it was a terrorist attack. >> very good. that's what john brennan said also. he used the word unequivocally. i would have to say we have to understand sometimes someone's going to have to ask the question, if that was true and we knew all that on the sunday this presentation by susan rice, for all of america, said it was -- we have today is that the fact is -- was, this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. unquote. i won't even ask you to respond to that but i think it's important that people understand that everybody knew on that sunday that it was a preplanned, premeditated attack. thank you for your tolerance, mr. chairman. >> senator reed. >> thank you, mr. chairman, thank you, mr. secretary, and mr. dempsey. as you point out in your testimony, two attacks, one on the compound, one on the annex. but as the time chart indicates, there seems to be a
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12